Western Rail Corridor (all disused sections)

Markcheese

I don't see the problem with someone putting a fence, garden or garage on the line.... As long as IE send a digger down the line soon.... If you've based your house, garden or driveway around or on land that's not yours... Then tough...! Walk the greenway ... Look through the windows of the locals, see how they really live... Just open the greenway.

The Idyll Race

Markcheese wrote: »

I don't see the problem with someone putting a fence, garden or garage on the line.... As long as IE send a digger down the line soon.... If you've based your house, garden or driveway around or on land that's not yours... Then tough...! Walk the greenway ... Look through the windows of the locals, see how they really live... Just open the greenway.

Is Claremorris - Collooney under Irish Rail's, ahem, "Care and Maintenance"?

The Idyll Race

westtip wrote: »

Yes it would be a laugh anway, greenway down the side of the track - it would make a great tourist attraction. You could invite octogenarian priests to wave at passing cyclists from the window - shouting "We delivered unto you":D

Sell it as a Historic Compromise!!

Judgement Day

yer man! wrote: »

Could something like this work for the likes of Ennis - Athenry, having a high frequency and cheap tickets would be an attractive option.

No - when a rail vehicle is no better than a bus on rails you're better off (comfort wise) on a bus on the road.

dowlingm

dowlingm wrote: »

I thought there had been money allocated to fencing the WRC a couple of years ago. I guess now I know why the obstructions didn't come to light then, because it wasn't?

I know it was fenced between Swinford and Charlestown and maybe further as a Friend of mine had the contract.

Cookie_Monster

Sponge Bob wrote: »

Slow the railcar to 20kph when passing cyclists..safety protocol vobe.

You'd never pass the cyclist then, they'd be way faster than 20kph

westtip

Markcheese wrote: »

I don't see the problem with someone putting a fence, garden or garage on the line.... As long as IE send a digger down the line soon.... If you've based your house, garden or driveway around or on land that's not yours... Then tough...! Walk the greenway ... Look through the windows of the locals, see how they really live... Just open the greenway.

Squatters rights is what they need to worry about. The garage forecourt of Casssidys garage (charlestown) has been using the grassy knoll there which sits on the line since the 1970s. The houses built with the line through their gardens also will eventually get squatters rights. This is public property which IE and the county councils are allowing to be absorbed into neighbouring properties. IE through sheer negligence, and the councils through the laziness of their planning departments. Mind you in the case of Cassidys, the owner of that garage fully supports a greenway - because of the crisps, chocolate, and soft drinks he would sell to tired hungry cyclists and walkers; and he thinks it would revolutionise Charlestown tourism. There is growing support for the greenway amongst businessesa along the route because they have seen what the Great western greenway has done for Newport and Mulranny. They want to see that success repeated, unfortunately, its not getting support from the local councils, because of the stranglehold of WOT and the Western Intercounty Railway committee on the councils.

The Idyll Race

westtip wrote: »

Squatters rights is what they need to worry about. The garage forecourt of Casssidys garage (charlestown) has been using the grassy knoll there which sits on the line since the 1970s. The houses built with the line through their gardens also will eventually get squatters rights. This is public property which IE and the county councils are allowing to be absorbed into neighbouring properties. IE through sheer negligence, and the councils through the laziness of their planning departments. Mind you in the case of Cassidys, the owner of that garage fully supports a greenway - because of the crisps, chocolate, and soft drinks he would sell to tired hungry cyclists and walkers; and he thinks it would revolutionise Charlestown tourism. There is growing support for the greenway amongst businessesa along the route because they have seen what the Great western greenway has done for Newport and Mulranny. They want to see that success repeated, unfortunately, its not getting support from the local councils, because of the stranglehold of WOT and the Western Intercounty Railway committee on the councils.

The puzzle here is why aren't WOT bothered about the encroachments on the line, particularly as other posters have stated that the Burma Road is the Holy Grail for them.

Our man in Havana

Do CIE/IE still legally own the alignments of other long closed lines? I am thinking Shillelagh-Woodenbridge, Tullow-Sallins etc?

westtip

The Idyll Race wrote: »

The puzzle here is why aren't WOT bothered about the encroachments on the line, particularly as other posters have stated that the Burma Road is the Holy Grail for them.

Its an interesting question which remains unanswered. I suggest a few letters to the county manager, in particular in Sligo asking - why this encroachment is allowed when it conflicts with the strategic objectives of the county plan. I will do some work on this and put a post with some further ideas.

eastwest

westtip wrote: »

Its an interesting question which remains unanswered. I suggest a few letters to the county manager, in particular in Sligo asking - why this encroachment is allowed when it conflicts with the strategic objectives of the county plan. I will do some work on this and put a post with some further ideas.

The onus is on CIE to keep the line clear of trespassers, but they are unlikely to do that unless instructed to do so by Varadker.
In a similar case in Limerick, where a farmer called Dowling was creating difficulties for the voluntary local group that created a greenway on the Abbeyfeale/Rathkeale section of the old Limerick/Tralee line, CIE admitted that they wouldn't spend money in lawyers to protect the alignment. That matter has been partly resolved to allow the greenway to proceed, but a slice of the original corridor has been lost to public ownership in the process.
CIE are likewise unlikely to protect the western rail corridor because they have no interest in it, and therefore have no budget for legals to protect it. The effective abandonment of the route by CIE is a clear pointer to the attitude of government to the route and to the likelihood of a rail line ever being built on it.
It all comes back to Varadker. He needs to get off the fence and (a) tell WOT et al publicly that the train ain't coming any time soon, and (b) tell CIE to protect the alignment in the public interest.
That however would be called "good governance" -- something that Varadker has shown himself incapable of with regards to this and other lines.

westtip

Most campaign groups are only too happy to show their facebook page off as the voice of their campaign, so stumbling on the Westontrack FB page this morning I wondered what have they got to hide?

http://www.facebook.com/#!/westontrack.westernrail

With this stern message on the homepage:

Westontrack only shares some information publicly. If you know Westontrack, send him a friend request or message him.

Compare this page with the greenway campaign:

http://www.facebook.com/#!/sligomayogreenway.campaign

eastwest

westtip wrote: »

Most campaign groups are only too happy to show their facebook page off as the voice of their campaign, so stumbling on the Westontrack FB page this morning I wondered what have they got to hide?

http://www.facebook.com/#!/westontrack.westernrail

With this stern message on the homepage:

Westontrack only shares some information publicly. If you know Westontrack, send him a friend request or message him.

Compare this page with the greenway campaign:

http://www.facebook.com/#!/sligomayogreenway.campaign

You need the secret handshake and the special knock on the door before they allow you in. Bring your baptismal cert as well; the councillors involved in this outfit are "strong on matters of faith", to quote one of them at a recent coco meeting!
It's a well known fact that cycling is an occasion of sin, not something to be encouraged by our youths and comely maidens.

The Idyll Race

We are a local community group
advocating the creation of a Cycling and Walking Greenway on the Collooney to
Claremorris section of the Western Rail Corridor. This will bring jobs ,
opportunities and tourists to our area. It will not stop the railway from being reinstated, should that ever become a reality

Are you sure about that last statement?

eastwest

The Idyll Race wrote: »

We are a local community group
advocating the creation of a Cycling and Walking Greenway on the Collooney to
Claremorris section of the Western Rail Corridor. This will bring jobs ,
opportunities and tourists to our area. It will not stop the railway from being reinstated, should that ever become a reality[/

Are you sure about that last statement?

The argument by WOT that a greenway would mean the end of plans for a railway is spurious.
Most importantly from the point of view of anyone lobbying for a railway, a greenway would keep the route open. Without the route, there can be no railway.
If the economic climate for a railway ever exists in the future, it can be built and a cycleway/walkway built alongside it. If there are "pinch points" then the greenway can be routed around them quite easily.
How can the future interests of the rail lobby be protected? It's very simple; keep the route in the ownership of CIE with the greenway built under license. In that case, CIE can move in on the route at any time and build a line, however unlikely that might seem in the current climate.
The cycling/walking lobby has always taken this reasoned approach for the most part, but WOT and the ICRC consistently refuse to accept this logic. A reasoned observer would have to wonder, why this "dog in the manger" approach, and why the reluctance to condemn squatters and protect the route? Have these shadowy people got another agenda altogether?

westtip

The Idyll Race wrote: »

Are you sure about that last statement?

Attachment not found. Read this short paper it hopefully will answer your question, its only two pages mainly pictures.

The Idyll Race

westtip wrote: »

Attachment not found. Read this short paper it hopefully will answer your question, its only two pages mainly pictures.

Nice pictures, though I suspect that much of the loading gauge outside stations wouldn't be for double track. There could be fun and games with landowners if diversions were needed. This of course is all theoretical in the present climate..

A complete photo survey would answer a lot of questions.

westtip

The Idyll Race wrote: »

Nice pictures, though I suspect that much of the loading gauge outside stations wouldn't be for double track. There could be fun and games with landowners if diversions were needed. This of course is all theoretical in the present climate..

A complete photo survey would answer a lot of questions.

the thing about the paper which was sent to the councils and various other bodies was simply to show, we haven't got a clue when it comes to planning these kind of facilities in Ireland - all the pictures show low impact engineering low cost projects (aside maybe from the Canterlevered walkway), We have one success story like the Great Western and spend the next five years clapping ourselves on our backs. I was walking in Derbyshire last weekend, Night and Day when it comes to the facilities we offer walking and cycling tourists. We are clueless. The paper submitted on parallel greenways also addressed another very important issue - rural isolation - or isolation if you haven't got a car. its a matter of changing our whole planning process and the way we think - a big issue!

The Idyll Race

westtip wrote: »

the thing about the paper which was sent to the councils and various other bodies was simply to show, we haven't got a clue when it comes to planning these kind of facilities in Ireland - all the pictures show low impact engineering low cost projects (aside maybe from the Canterlevered walkway), We have one success story like the Great Western and spend the next five years clapping ourselves on our backs. I was walking in Derbyshire last weekend, Night and Day when it comes to the facilities we offer walking and cycling tourists. We are clueless. The paper submitted on parallel greenways also addressed another very important issue - rural isolation - or isolation if you haven't got a car. its a matter of changing our whole planning process and the way we think - a big issue!

Indeed, all good points. Still doesn't address how the greenway could be built parallel to the railway when I am pretty certain that the bulk of Claremorris - Collooney was built as single track.

westtip

The Idyll Race wrote: »

Indeed, all good points. Still doesn't address how the greenway could be built parallel to the railway when I am pretty certain that the bulk of Claremorris - Collooney was built as single track.

There is plenty of room along the alignment for both, of course this is pretty much academic - as the railway is never going to happen and the begrudgers (our national pastime) will stop the greenway from being put in; which would of course protect the alignment for any future (yet highly unlikely) reinstatement of a railway line - which as we all know simply has no justification at all.

eastwest

westtip wrote: »

The Idyll Race wrote: »

Indeed, all good points. Still doesn't address how the greenway could be built parallel to the railway when I am pretty certain that the bulk of Claremorris - Collooney was built as single track.

There is plenty of room along the alignment for both, of course this is pretty much academic - as the railway is never going to happen and the begrudgers (our national pastime) will stop the greenway from being put in; which would of course protect the alignment for any future (yet highly unlikely) reinstatement of a railway line - which as we all know simply has no justification at all.

While logic dictates that the railway project is dead in the water, and ministers all privately agree that it is a pipe dream, the reality is that a strong lobby group of local politicians and clergy have painted themselves into a corner by promising a railway. They cannot easily back down from this position, so if they ever decide to adopt a compromise it will be on the basis of sharing the route with a cycleway.
So whereas any sensible minister would simply decide to follow logic and have the route preserved in public ownership by establishing a greenway on it, political realities mean that the promise of a railway will always have to form part of the solution. It might seem crazy to normal people, and I agree that it will probably never happen, but all shades of opinion must be humoured if politicians are to be re-elected.

The Idyll Race

eastwest wrote: »

While logic dictates that the railway project is dead in the water, and ministers all privately agree that it is a pipe dream, the reality is that a strong lobby group of local politicians and clergy have painted themselves into a corner by promising a railway. They cannot easily back down from this position, so if they ever decide to adopt a compromise it will be on the basis of sharing the route with a cycleway.
So whereas any sensible minister would simply decide to follow logic and have the route preserved in public ownership by establishing a greenway on it, political realities mean that the promise of a railway will always have to form part of the solution. It might seem crazy to normal people, and I agree that it will probably never happen, but all shades of opinion must be humoured if politicians are to be re-elected.

There is one slight problem with that logic, the route is in public ownership anyway through CIÉ. The railway line, believe it or not, has never been abandoned, which is a distinct legal process, and CIÉ at any time can assert its rights over the railway irrespective of any squatting that has happened.

Building a greenway does not change that situation.

eastwest

The Idyll Race wrote: »

eastwest wrote: »

While logic dictates that the railway project is dead in the water, and ministers all privately agree that it is a pipe dream, the reality is that a strong lobby group of local politicians and clergy have painted themselves into a corner by promising a railway. They cannot easily back down from this position, so if they ever decide to adopt a compromise it will be on the basis of sharing the route with a cycleway.
So whereas any sensible minister would simply decide to follow logic and have the route preserved in public ownership by establishing a greenway on it, political realities mean that the promise of a railway will always have to form part of the solution. It might seem crazy to normal people, and I agree that it will probably never happen, but all shades of opinion must be humoured if politicians are to be re-elected.

There is one slight problem with that logic, the route is in public ownership anyway through CIÉ. The railway line, believe it or not, has never been abandoned, which is a distinct legal process, and CIÉ at any time can assert its rights over the railway irrespective of any squatting that has happened.

Building a greenway does not change that situation.

Although not formally abandoned, in practice CIE has abandoned the line. Several sections have been captured by squatters and at least one has effectively established rights by adverse possession. CIE would have to engage in expensive litigation in order to clear the route and would have to buy back at least one stretch.
In Limerick, CIE refused to spend money on lawyers to move a farmer off the line, and instead allowed him to retain buildings and a yard that were built in part on the rail corridor. Effectively a piece of public property was appropriated by an individual and CIE and the minister did nothing about it. They won't do anything about it in Sligo/Mayo either, and locals know that and continue to squat on the line.
Apart from incompetence, some of the CIE attitude can be explained by their attitude to the line; they know that a railway will never be built on it and that the minister doesn't give a damn about it, so why bother?
The reason that WOT and the ICRB don't object to squatters may be that they believe that when the line is being built there will be plenty of "Dublin money" to not only do the work but also to "compensate" squatters. If they object to squatters they might lose support locally, whereas if they say nothing, everybody wins.
In the case of a branch line near Kiltimagh, a mere mention of a possible greenway a couple of years ago resulted in barbed wire going up all over the place as locals saw an opportunity to capture "compensation" of the levels enjoyed elsewhere by similar squatters.

westtip

eastwest wrote: »

eastwest wrote: »

How can the future interests of the rail lobby be protected? It's very simple; keep the route in the ownership of CIE with the greenway built under license. In that case, CIE can move in on the route at any time and build a line, however unlikely that might seem in the current climate.

This is exactly what Sustrans have done in the UK and its exactly the model Sustrans have explained to Failte Ireland - its also exactly the model the author of the National Cycle Network policy document knows about - this document was authored by the NRA; this eminently sensible approach is in practice happening in the UK, where the ownership of the route remains with the rail operating company but the path/greenway is put in place. But here? No the nettle just cannot be grasped there are too many vested interests and fingers in the pot to just get on with it.

The Idyll Race

Could that quote above be fixed because it gives the misleading impression that I have written it. Thanks.

yer man!

I need to get from Ennis to Galway tomorrow evening, I was inquiring on the price of tickets for both the bus and the train. Train costs €18.50 (single) and the bus is €9.50, bus is also 10 mins faster...... Do they want passengers at all?

end of the road

yer man! wrote: »

Do they want passengers at all?

no

rainbowdash

Passengers are hassle, they break things, the mess the jacks, the leave rubbish on the train, they cause overcrowding, they make complaints etc.,

The less passengers on trains and hanging around stations the easier the job of the staff.

Markcheese

yer man! wrote: »

I need to get from Ennis to Galway tomorrow evening, I was inquiring on the price of tickets for both the bus and the train. Train costs €18.50 (single) and the bus is €9.50, bus is also 10 mins faster...... Do they want passengers at all?

Had to get from ennis to cork last autumn, decided to take train, change at Limerick... Times all suited.. Problem was ennis train had to wait for a train to leave to get a platform space... The limerick junction train.. Upshot was it took me till after midnight with a three hour wait to get to cork...won't use it again..

yer man!

Markcheese wrote: »

Had to get from ennis to cork last autumn, decided to take train, change at Limerick... Times all suited.. Problem was ennis train had to wait for a train to leave to get a platform space... The limerick junction train.. Upshot was it took me till after midnight with a three hour wait to get to cork...won't use it again..

To be fair they don't advertise an ennis to cork service see as it requires 2 changes, found put a student from Ennis to Athenry is €10 single so I shall be using it later today to see what the service is like.